1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 August 2018 b. Date Received: 8 August 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, was a young Soldier going through a divorce, which caused the applicant's focus to be misguided in a manner that caused misjudgment and errors. The applicant provides evidence with the application, which reflects the type of individual the applicant is. The applicant implores the Board to consider that at the time, the applicant was judged swiftly and had attempted to reach out to the chain of command, but was not really given the support necessary during a stressful time. The applicant never planned on leaving the Army and only ever wanted to be a career Soldier. The applicant hopes the supporting documents reflect greatly on the applicant's character, not only as a Soldier, but as a civilian. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of Alcohol Dependence, Cocaine Dependence, Concussion w/o LOC (slipped in the shower), Nicotine Dependence, and Opioid Dependence. The VA has diagnosed the applicant with Cocaine Use Disorder. In summary, the applicant does not have a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 16 August 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the characterization was improper. The record shows the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a biochemical test which was coded RO (Rehabilitation Testing) and that it was part of the applicant's Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) treatment plan. The inclusion of the test administered as part of the applicant's rehabilitation program is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85 and is protected evidence. Use of this information mandates award of an honorable characterization of service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. However, the Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 1 March 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 February 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Between on or about 28 November 2016 and on or about 30 November 2016, he was absent without leave; On 21 November 2016, he failed to report to accountability formation located at the basketball court behind building 9469 at 0630 hours; On 16 November 2016, he failed to report to accountability formation located at building 1650 at 0630 hours; On 27 October 2016, he failed to report to the CQ desk at building 9469; On 17 October 2016 and 13 October 2016, he failed to report to McKibben Gym for the Army Physical Fitness Test at 0630 hours; and, On 14 October 2016, he failed to report to accountability formation, located at Widefield Community Park at 0600 hours. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 3 February 2017 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 26 February 2017 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 17 June 2014 / 3 years, 23 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 105 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92F10, Petroleum Supply Specialist / 2 years, 8 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Two Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Confined by Civil Authorities (CCA)," effective 14 December 2016; and, From "CCA" to "PDY," effective 15 December 2016. Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 10 January 2017, reflects the applicant tested positive for COC 1010 (cocaine), during a Rehabilitation Testing (RO) urinalysis testing, conducted on 16 December 2016. Commander's Report, dated 3 February 2017, reflects the applicant received a CG Article 15, dated 28 September 2016, for violation of two specifications of Article 86 or failure to report to physical training formation. Punishment adjudged: Reduction to Private First Class, (suspended); forfeiture of $458 pay (suspended); extra duty and restriction for 7 days. The suspension of the punishments of: Reduction to Private First Class (E-3) and forfeiture of $458 was vacated on 18 January 2017, for failure to report to the appointed place of duty. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 1 day (CCA, 14 December 2016) / Released from CCA. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 22 November 2016, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with: Cocaine Dependence. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; Examination Grade Report; Certification Letter; High School transcript; South Oldham Fire Training Attendance record; Kentucky Fire Commission, State Fire Rescue Training; REDD Report; Class Grade Sheet; Diploma; AAM Certificate. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant provided evidence that he has earned the Colorado Asbestos Certification. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general (under honorable conditions) or an honorable discharge may be granted. Paragraph 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's separation packet contains an electronic DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document for Drug Testing), which show that the urinalysis test was coded RO, which indicates "Rehabilitation Testing." The government introduced this document into the discharge process revealing the applicant had self-referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) for substance abuse. This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85. Use of this information mandates award of an honorable discharge. The discharge was not consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was not within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was not provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 16 August 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the characterization was improper. The record shows the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a biochemical test which was coded RO (Rehabilitation Testing) and that it was part of the applicant's Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) treatment plan. The inclusion of the test administered as part of the applicant's rehabilitation program is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85 and is protected evidence. Use of this information mandates award of an honorable characterization of service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. However, the Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20180015775 3